Even if they lose, he should be the MVP. Probably doesn't have a shot in the minds of the voters without making the playoffs though.

Just my opinion, but a running back should never be MVP, just due to the nature of the position. If they changed the award to be for the most outstanding player, I could see it, but the word valuable basically limits it to quarterbacks only.

Even if they lose, he should be the MVP. Probably doesn't have a shot in the minds of the voters without making the playoffs though.

Just my opinion, but a running back should never be MVP, just due to the nature of the position. If they changed the award to be for the most outstanding player, I could see it, but the word valuable basically limits it to quarterbacks only.

Peterson this year has been an exception. I don't remember the last time a RB was so integral to his team's success._________________
Adopt-a-Patriot: Malcolm Butler
Status: Emergent
#OnToBaltimore

Even if they lose, he should be the MVP. Probably doesn't have a shot in the minds of the voters without making the playoffs though.

Just my opinion, but a running back should never be MVP, just due to the nature of the position. If they changed the award to be for the most outstanding player, I could see it, but the word valuable basically limits it to quarterbacks only.

Peterson this year has been an exception. I don't remember the last time a RB was so integral to his team's success.

Yeah, I can see both sides of it. Thing is though (to Richter's point), if you disqualify a RB based on "the nature of the position" you are pretty much limiting the MVP race to QB's.

But, other than Barry Sanders, I can't remember too many other RB's who single-handedly carried his team to playoff contention the way Peterson has this year.